DOCSLIB.ORG

2015-005890Des

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2015-005890Des Landmark Designation Case Report Hearing Date: October 5, 2016 Case No.: 2015-005890DES Project Address: 546-548 Fillmore Street, 554 Fillmore Street, 735 Fell Street, 660 Oak Street Zoning: RM-3 Residential-Mixed, Medium Density; RM-1 Residential- Mixed, Low Density Block/Lot: 0828/021, 0828/022, 0828/022A, 0828/012 Property Owner: Noe Vista LLC 3265 17th St., Ste. 403 San Francisco, CA 94110 554 Fillmore Street LLC 1760 Mission St. San Francisco, CA 94103 Staff Contact: Shannon Ferguson – (415) 575-9074 [email protected] Reviewed By: Tim Frye – (415) 575-6822 [email protected] PROPERTY DESCRIPTION & SURROUNDING LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT The Sacred Heart Parish Complex is situated on four contiguous lots on the city block bounded by Fillmore Street to the west, Fell Street to the north, Webster Street to the east, and Oak Street to the south in the Western Addition neighborhood, a largely residential neighborhood characterized by three and four story multi-family buildings. Sacred Heart Church (1898, 1909) is set at the southeast corner of Fillmore and Fell streets. Sacred Heart School (1926) is immediately east of the church on Fell Street. The rectory (ca. 1891, 1906) is immediately south of the church on Fillmore Street. The convent (1936) fronts Oak Street. An adjacent lot associated with the convent contains a paved parking area. The four lots converge in the center of the block to form an enclosed school yard. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The case before the Historic Preservation Commission is the consideration of the initiation of landmark designation of Sacred Heart Parish Complex as a San Francisco landmark under Article 10 of the Planning Code, Section 1004.1, and recommending that the Board of Supervisors approve of such designation. www.sfplanning.org Landmark Designation Initiation Case Number 2015-005890DES October 5, 2016 Sacred Heart Parish Complex ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STATUS The Planning Department has determined that actions by regulatory agencies for protection of the environment (specifically in this case, landmark designation) are exempt from environmental review, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15308 (Class Eight - Categorical). GENERAL PLAN POLICIES The Urban Design Element of the San Francisco General Plan contains the following relevant objectives and policies: OBJECTIVE 2: Conservation of Resources that provide a sense of nature, continuity with the past, and freedom from overcrowding. POLICY 4: Preserve notable landmarks and areas of historic, architectural or aesthetic value, and promote the preservation of other buildings and features that provide continuity with past development. Designating significant historic resources as local landmarks will further continuity with the past because the buildings will be preserved for the benefit of future generations. Landmark designation will require that the Planning Department and the Historic Preservation Commission review proposed work that may have an impact on character-defining features. Both entities will utilize the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties in their review to ensure that only appropriate, compatible alterations are made. SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING CODE SECTION 101.1 – GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY AND IMPLEMENTATION Planning Code Section 101.1 – Eight Priority Policies establishes and requires review of permits for consistency with said policies. On balance, the proposed designation is consistent with the priority policies in that: a. The proposed designation will further Priority Policy No. 7, that landmarks and historic buildings be preserved. Landmark designation of the Sacred Heart Parish Complex, will help to preserve an important historical resource that is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; and was designed by a master architect. BACKGROUND / PREVIOUS ACTIONS The Sacred Heart Parish Complex landmark designation report was funded by the Historic Preservation Fund Committee and prepared by Elaine Stiles, Historic Preservation Consultant. OTHER ACTIONS REQUIRED If the Historic Preservation Commission adopts a resolution to initiate designation of the subject property as an Article 10 landmark at its October 5, 2016 hearing and directs staff to finalize the landmark designation report, a second Historic Preservation Commission hearing will be scheduled for the 2 Landmark Designation Initiation Case Number 2015-005890DES October 5, 2016 Sacred Heart Parish Complex Commission’s recommendation of approval of the designation. At the second hearing, if the Historic Preservation Commission recommends approval of the designation, its recommendation will be sent by the Department to the Board of Supervisors. The nomination would then be considered at a future Board of Supervisors hearing for formal Article 10 landmark designation. APPLICABLE PRESERVATION STANDARDS ARTICLE 10 Section 1004 of the Planning Code authorizes the landmark designation of an individual structure or other feature or an integrated group of structures and features on a single lot or site, having special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value, as a landmark. Section 1004.1 also outlines that landmark designation may be initiated by the Board of Supervisors or the Historic Preservation Commission and the initiation shall include findings in support. Section 1004.2 states that once initiated, the proposed designation is referred to the Historic Preservation Commission for a report and recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to approve, disapprove or modify the proposal. Pursuant to Section 1004.3 of the Planning Code, if the Historic Preservation Commission approves the designation, a copy of the resolution of approval is transmitted to the Board of Supervisors and without referral to the Planning Commission. The Board of Supervisors shall hold a public hearing on the designation and may approve, modify or disapprove the designation. In the case of the initiation of a historic district, the Historic Preservation Commission shall refer its recommendation to the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 1004.2(c). The Planning Commission shall have 45 days to provide review and comment on the proposed designation and address the consistency of the proposed designation with the General Plan, Section 101.1 priority policies, the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation and the Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Bay Area. These comments shall be sent to the Board of Supervisors in the form of a resolution. Section 1004(b) requires that the designating ordinance approved by the Board of Supervisors shall include the location and boundaries of the landmark site, a description of the characteristics of the landmark which justify its designation, and a description of the particular features that should be preserved. Section 1004.4 states that if the Historic Preservation Commission disapproves the proposed designation, such action shall be final, except upon the filing of a valid appeal to the Board of Supervisors within 30 days. ARTICLE 10 LANDMARK CRITERIA The Historic Preservation Commission on February 4, 2009, by Resolution No. 001, adopted the National Register Criteria as its methodology for recommending landmark designation of historic resources. Under the National Register Criteria, the quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, feeling, materials, workmanship, and association, and that 3 Landmark Designation Initiation Case Number 2015-005890DES October 5, 2016 Sacred Heart Parish Complex are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or properties that have yielded, or may likely yield, information important in prehistory or history. PUBLIC / NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT There is no known public or neighborhood opposition to designation of Sacred Heart Parish Complex as an Article 10 landmark. The Department received several letters in support of landmark designation (attached). The Department will provide any public correspondence received after the submittal of this report in the Historic Preservation Commission’s correspondence folder. PROPERTY OWNER INPUT Property owner Noe Vista LLC and 554 Fillmore Street LLC have been informed of the landmark designation and have worked with staff to refine and finalize the character defining features of the landmark designation. STAFF ANALYSIS The case report and following analysis was prepared by Department preservation staff. The Department has determined that the subject property meets the requirements for Article 10 eligibility as an individual landmark. The justification for its inclusion is outlined below under the Significance and Integrity sections of this case report. SIGNIFICANCE EVENTS: Association with events that have made a significant contribution to the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Union Members Face Challenges
    Published by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union DISPATCHER www.ilwu.org VOL 74, NO 11 • DECEMBER 2016 THE INSIDE NEWS HOLIDAY BOOKS 4&5 ILWU members help Alaska public radio survive 7 ILWU Canada members fight to protect maritime jobs 8 TRANSITIONS 7 Getting out the vote in Missouri: Local 5 member Ron Solomon talks with a Missouri voter about the issues facing working class Americans. The ILWU sent teams to support pro-union candidates in six states. Trump stuns the establishment; union ILWU solidarity helps Hanjin seafarers defend their right to shore leave page 6 members face challenges onald Trump stunned the scapegoating, racism and threats to have that were gone now because the political establish- of violence that Trump used to of NAFTA,” said Local 6 member ment on November 8 manipulate media coverage and tap Victor Pamiroyan who travelled to D into dangerous hate politics. Nobody Ohio with Erik Ferrel of the IBU with a knockout blow to can say for sure whether Sanders and Local 5’s Mark Sailor and Ron conventional wisdom and would have prevailed over Trump Solomon. The quartet hoped to corporate liberalism, delivered if he were running instead of Clin- win support for pro-union Sen- by angry working-class voters. ton, but he did prove it was possible ate candidate Ted Strickland, but “America’s working class has to win big support from working quickly came to realize how hard been frozen out or falling behind class and independent voters in their task was to reach voters who for three decades while the upper Michigan and Wisconsin who em- had been hammered by decades of crust has been partying with braced Sanders over Clinton in both job losses.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin Luther King Jr., Cesar Chavez, and the Images of Their Movements
    MIXED UP IN THE MAKING: MARTIN LUTHER KING JR., CESAR CHAVEZ, AND THE IMAGES OF THEIR MOVEMENTS A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School University of Missouri-Columbia In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by ANDREA SHAN JOHNSON Dr. Robert Weems, Jr., Dissertation Supervisor MAY 2006 © Copyright by Andrea Shan Johnson 2006 All Rights Reserved The undersigned, appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled MIXED UP IN THE MAKING: MARTIN LUTHER KING JR., CESAR CHAVEZ AND THE IMAGES OF THEIR MOVEMENTS Presented by Andrea Shan Johnson A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of History And hereby certify that in their opinion it is worthy of acceptance. __________________________________________________________ Professor Robert Weems, Jr. __________________________________________________________ Professor Catherine Rymph __________________________________________________________ Professor Jeffery Pasley __________________________________________________________ Professor Abdullahi Ibrahim ___________________________________________________________ Professor Peggy Placier ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe thanks to many people for helping me in the completion of this dissertation. Thanks go first to my advisor, Dr. Robert Weems, Jr. of the History Department of the University of Missouri- Columbia, for his advice and guidance. I also owe thanks to the rest of my committee, Dr. Catherine Rymph, Dr. Jeff Pasley, Dr. Abdullahi Ibrahim, and Dr. Peggy Placier. Similarly, I am grateful for my Master’s thesis committee at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis, Dr. Annie Gilbert Coleman, Dr. Nancy Robertson, and Dr. Michael Snodgrass, who suggested that I might undertake this project. I would also like to thank the staff at several institutions where I completed research.
    [Show full text]
  • Catholic Women Religious in the San Francisco Bay Area, 1850
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Sisterhood on the Frontier: Catholic Women Religious in the San Francisco Bay Area, 1850- 1925 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology by Jamila Jamison Sinlao Committee in charge: Professor Denise Bielby, Chair Professor Jon Cruz Professor Simonetta Falasca-Zamponi Professor John Mohr December 2018 The dissertation of Jamila Jamison Sinlao is approved. Jon Cruz Simonetta Falsca-Zamponi John Mohr Denise Bielby, Committee Chair December 2018 Sisterhood on the Frontier: Catholic Women Religious in the San Francisco Bay Area, 1850- 1925 Copyright © 2018 by Jamila Jamison Sinlao iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In so many ways, this dissertation is a labor of love, shaped by the formative years that I spent as a student at Mercy High School, Burlingame. There, the “Mercy spirit”—one of hospitality and generosity, resilience and faith—was illustrated by the many stories we heard about Catherine McAuley and Mary Baptist Russell. The questions that guide this project grew out of my Mercy experience, and so I would like to thank the many teachers, both lay and religious, who nurtured my interest in this fascinating slice of history. This project would not have been possible without the archivists who not only granted me the privilege to access their collections, but who inspired me with their passion, dedication, and deep historical knowledge. I am indebted to Chris Doan, former archivist for the Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary; Sister Marilyn Gouailhardou, RSM, regional community archivist for the Sisters of Mercy Burlingame; Sister Margaret Ann Gainey, DC, archivist for the Daughters of Charity, Seton Provincialate; Kathy O’Connor, archivist for the Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur, California Province; and Sister Michaela O’Connor, SHF, archivist for the Sisters of the Holy Family.
    [Show full text]
  • August 24~1973
    The official poice of the pnited Farmworkers English I August 24~1973 Negotiations with Teamsters Broken Peace talks between the The talks held in Burlin- Following the UFW walk - know what they should do to following the Teamsters' United Farm Workers, the gam~ California were set-up out, Fitzsimmons said, "The show good faith." truckers' strike there, but Teamsters and top AFL - CIO after AFL-CIO head Georg", cnntracts in'Delano have been The UnIon has stated it the strike was postponed be­ officials ended abruptly Au­ Meany and Teamster 'Presi- repudiated as they were nego­ will not return to the nego ­ cause of the talks, 'Chavez gust 10 when Cesar' Chavez dent Frank Fitzsimmons con~ tiated by a Teamster negotia­ tiating table until the Teams­ said. and Univn chief counsel Jer­ ducted a series of talks in tor with no authority to do so. ters give Meany "iron-clad" The Delano growers have ry Cohen walked out when they Washington. The signing of They were a direct violation assurances of their good faith. admitted they knew; before learned area supervisor Jim the Delano contracts was a of my instructions:' He said the Teamsters had they signed the secret con­ Smith of the Teamsters had violation of the partial Einar Mohn, head of the shown they were not willing tracts they were jeopardizing signed contracts with 25 De­ ..cease-fire...·on which. both Western Conference, of to negotiate in good faith by the peace talks. lano a.rea table grape growers. unions had agreed. Teamsters reportedly has their "tricks". the UFW John GUi&marra, Jr., one sent Chavez a telegram say- says it has kept its word and of the 'largest grape growers, BULLETIN Cesar Chavez told suppor- ing he hoped Chavez would re­ stuck to the agreements for reported the growers are The Delano office of the ters in Visalia he .deplored turn to the bargaining table, the talks.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnohistory and Ethnogeography of the Coast Miwok and Their Neighbors, 1783-1840
    ETHNOHISTORY AND ETHNOGEOGRAPHY OF THE COAST MIWOK AND THEIR NEIGHBORS, 1783-1840 by Randall Milliken Technical Paper presented to: National Park Service, Golden Gate NRA Cultural Resources and Museum Management Division Building 101, Fort Mason San Francisco, California Prepared by: Archaeological/Historical Consultants 609 Aileen Street Oakland, California 94609 June 2009 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY This report documents the locations of Spanish-contact period Coast Miwok regional and local communities in lands of present Marin and Sonoma counties, California. Furthermore, it documents previously unavailable information about those Coast Miwok communities as they struggled to survive and reform themselves within the context of the Franciscan missions between 1783 and 1840. Supplementary information is provided about neighboring Southern Pomo-speaking communities to the north during the same time period. The staff of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) commissioned this study of the early native people of the Marin Peninsula upon recommendation from the report’s author. He had found that he was amassing a large amount of new information about the early Coast Miwoks at Mission Dolores in San Francisco while he was conducting a GGNRA-funded study of the Ramaytush Ohlone-speaking peoples of the San Francisco Peninsula. The original scope of work for this study called for the analysis and synthesis of sources identifying the Coast Miwok tribal communities that inhabited GGNRA parklands in Marin County prior to Spanish colonization. In addition, it asked for the documentation of cultural ties between those earlier native people and the members of the present-day community of Coast Miwok. The geographic area studied here reaches far to the north of GGNRA lands on the Marin Peninsula to encompass all lands inhabited by Coast Miwoks, as well as lands inhabited by Pomos who intermarried with them at Mission San Rafael.
    [Show full text]
  • University of California Santa Cruz
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ PRECARIOUS CITY: MARGINAL WORKERS, THE STATE, AND WORKING-CLASS ACTIVISM IN POST-INDUSTRIAL SAN FRANCISCO, 1964-1979 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in HISTORY by Laura Renata Martin March 2014 The dissertation of Laura Renata Martin is approved: ------------------------------------------------------- Professor Dana Frank, chair ------------------------------------------------------- Professor David Brundage ------------------------------------------------------- Professor Alice Yang ------------------------------------------------------- Professor Eileen Boris ------------------------------------------------------- Tyrus Miller, Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies Table of Contents Introduction. 1 Chapter One. The War Over the War on Poverty: Civil Rights Groups, the War on Poverty, and the “Democratization” of the Great Society 53 Chapter Two. Crisis of Social Reproduction: Organizing Around Public Housing and Welfare Rights 107 Chapter Three. Policing and Black Power: The Hunters Point Riot, The San Francisco Police Department, and The Black Panther Party 171 Chapter Four. Labor Against the Working Class: The International Longshore Workers’ Union, Organized Labor, and Downtown Redevelopment 236 Chapter Five. Contesting Sexual Labor in the Post-Industrial City: Prostitution, Policing, and Sex Worker Organizing in the Tenderloin 296 Conclusion. 364 Bibliography. 372 iii Abstract Precarious City: Marginal Workers, the State, and Working-Class Activism in Post- Industrial San Francisco, 1964-1979 Laura Renata Martin This project investigates the effects of San Francisco’s transition from an industrial to a post-industrial economy on the city’s social movements between 1964 and 1979. I re-contextualize the city’s Black freedom, feminist, and gay and transgender liberation movements as struggles over the changing nature of urban working-class life and labor in the postwar period.
    [Show full text]
  • Archdiocese of San Francisco
    ARCHDIOCESE OF SAN FRANCISCO 2019 Official Directory BAY AREA LOCATION Religous Gifts & Books, Church Goods & Candles Now with 5 locations to serve you: Northern California S.San Francisco 369 Grand Ave 650-583-5153 Central California Modesto 2900 Standiford Ave 209-523-2579 Fresno 3065 E. Ashlan Ave 559-227-7373 Southern California Los Angeles 1701 James M Wood 213-385-3366 Long Beach 1960 Del Amo Blvd 562-424-0963 www.cotters.com 800-446-3366 [email protected] 2019 ARCHDIOCESE OF SAN FRANCISCO DIRECTORY 1 Archdiocese ........................................ Pages 3 – Insignia and Mission . 3 – Past Archbishops and Auxiliary Bishops; Titles and Statistics . 4 – Regional Dioceses and Other Assemblies . 5 – Archbishop and Auxiliary Bishops . 6 – Archbishop’s Boards and Councils . 9 – Honorary Prelates . 10 – Pastoral Center . 11 – Youth Groups and Young Adults . 15 Clergy / Religious ........................................ 16 – Priest Information . 18 – Deacon Information . 28 – Religious Orders of Men . 33 – Religious Orders of Women . 35 Parishes ................................................ 38 – San Francisco . 40 – Marin . 50 – San Mateo . 54 – Eastern Catholic Churches . 62 – Other Spiritual . 64 Catholic Schools ......................................... 68 Services ................................................ 76 – Organizations and Services . 77 – Catholic Charities . 82 – Honors and Awards . 84 Indexes ................................................. 88 – Advertising Classifieds . 89 – Advertising Index . 91 – Directory
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 43 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 76 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 67 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission 375 Beale Street, Suite 510, San Francisco, California 94105 tel 415 352 3600 fax 888 348 5190 State of California | Gavin Newsom – Governor | [email protected] | www.bcdc.ca.gov May 5, 2020 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: I am pleased to transmit this updated San Francisco Bay Plan, which was revised by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) in the fall of 2019. The Commission approved two groundbreaking Bay Plan amendments – the Bay Fill Amendment to allow substantially more fill to be placed in the Bay as part of an approved multi-benefit habitat restoration and shoreline adaptation project to help address Rising Sea Levels, and the Environmental Justice and Social Equity Amendment to implement BCDC’s first- ever formal environmental justice and social equity requirements for local project sponsors.
    [Show full text]
  • Was Jonestown a CIA Medical Experiment? a Review of the Evidence
    Was Jonestown A CIA Medical Experiment? A Review of the Evidence Michael Meiers Studies in American Religion Volume 35 The Edwin Mellen Press Lewiston/Queenston/Lampeter Library of Congress Cataloging-inPublication Data Meiers, Michael. Was Jonestown a CIA experiment?: a review of the evidence/ Michael Meiers. p. cm. — (Studies in American religion ; v. 35) Bibliography: p. Includes index. ISBN 0-88946-013-2 1. Jonestown Mass Suicide, Jonestown, Guyana, 1978. 2. Jones, Jim, 1931-1978. 3. United States. Central Intelligence Agency. 4. Brainwashing. I. Title. II. Series. BP605.P46M44 1989 988* .11—dcl9 88-30698 CIP © 1988 Michael Meiers. All rights reserved. FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: THE EDWIN MELLEN PRESS P.O. Box 450 Box 67 Lewiston, New York Queenston, Ontario U.S.A. 14092 CANADA LOS 1L0 Mellen House Lampeter, Dyfed, Wales UNITED KINGDOM SA48 7DY Printed in the United States of America LIBRARY CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ELLENSBURG. WASHINGTON TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page Acknowledgement Prologue I 1 Heil Hitler! 1 2 Deep Cover 25 3 From the Cradle to the Company 103 4 Three Countries, Three Commissions 127 5 A California Concentration Camp 167 6 The 'H' File Homicides 195 7 Moscone, Milk and Murder 277 8 Publicity, Provocateuring and Political Power 333 9 Of Dogs and Monkeys 351 10 It's a Jungle Out There 363 11 The Experiment 385 12 One Cookie 407 13 The White Night 415 14 Various Villains and Victims 459 15 The Phantom Preacher 519 Renegade Faction 539 Epilogue 551 Footnotes 553 Selected Bibliography 563 Index 569 "You have to put fear aside and do what you think is right.” — Leo Ryan on the eve of his visit to Jonestown.
    [Show full text]
  • The Demolition of a San Jose Neighborhood
    URBAN RENEWAL AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT: THE DEMOLITION OF A SAN JOSE NEIGHBORHOOD _________________ A University Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, East Bay _________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in History _________________ By Jan Maureen McDaniel September 2017 URBANURBAN RENEWALRENEVTAL ANDAND THETHE BUILTBI"ILT ENVIRONMENT:ENVIRONMENT: THETHE DEMOLITIONDEMOLITION OFOF AA SANSAN JOSEJOSE NEIGHBORHOODNEIGHBORHOOD ByBy JanJan MaureenMaureen McDanielMcDaniel Approved:Approved: Date:Date: ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I’d like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the staff at History San José for their guidance and expertise. Staff members Catherine Mills and Nadine Nelson were tireless in their efforts to help me uncover the secrets of the lost west-of-Market neighborhood. I would also like to thank the librarians in the California Room of the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Library in San Jose for sharing their tremendous knowledge regarding the navigation of San Jose’s historical records. Finally, I wish to express my profound appreciation to the members of my thesis committee, Professor Linda Ivey and Professor Anna Alexander, for their wonderful support, endless patience, and insightful feedback regarding my thesis. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables v List of Photographs vi List of Maps vii Chapter 1 Introduction 1 San Jose Historical Background 2 Redevelopment Era History 7 Chapter 2 Historiography 15 Chapter 3 Methodology 25 Sanborn Maps 26 Tax Assessor Records 28 City Directories 31 Other Resources 32 Analysis of Data 33 Chapter 4 Findings 35 Historic Significance 36 Architectural Significance 43 Degree of Blight 50 Chapter 5 In the Name of Historic Preservation 60 Bibliography 69 Publications 69 Archival Sources 73 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Black Women's Forgotten Crusade for Survival in the Free Breakfast For
    Breakfast of Unsung Heroes: Black Women’s Forgotten Crusade for Survival in the Free Breakfast for Children Meredith Wade Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Prerequisite for Honors in History April 2017 © 2017 Meredith J. Wade 1 Acknowledgements I would like to thank Ruth Beckford-Smith, Safiya Bukhari, Ora Williams, Barbara Easley-Cox, Claudia Williams, J. Yasmeen Sutton, Paula Reebles, Vanetta Molson, Tamara Lacey, and the countless other women who gave so generously of themselves to protect, serve, and celebrate their communities through food and other forms of radical, creative community care. Your stories inspire and guide us through the work that is yet to be done. My deepest gratitude is owed to Prof. Brenna Greer for seeing what is possible in this project and challenging me to bring it fully to fruition, for being my first and most patient mentor at Wellesley, and for being real with me about the emotional, intellectual, and political limits of academia. Thank you to Prof. Ryan Quintana for helping me bring a tiny shadow of an idea to a fully formed scholarly project, for constantly reminding me that I was capable of pursuing it, and for recommending the best music and books. Thanks for sticking with me even though I ditched you for 20th century history. My fellow thesis students and our fearless seminar leader, Katherine Grandjean, kept me on track, motivated, and curious. The Jerome Schiff and F.A.O. Schwarz Fellowships helped me meet some of the most important people in this story. Many thanks to the patient and knowledgeable archivists at AAMLO, UC Berkeley, and the Archdiocese of San Francisco.
    [Show full text]